@@> Intercept between Day Brown and All
 @@> on "Revealing Truth"
 
 DB> It struck me while reading Thucydides, that the Semite's view of
 DB> truth was what somebody coming back from the desert or mountains
 DB> said was the word of God.  Whereas, in the Greeks, when a leader
 DB> like Pericles or Brasidas speaks, he begins with what is already
 DB> well known, and pointing out related data, continues to conclude
 DB> what the truth is.  Faith in the authority of the speaker is not
 DB> relevant. There is the expectation that the audience is rational
 DB> enough to understand the logic needed to support the truth.
 
   The Semite grasp of desert vision HAS resulted in one of the most
 long lasting successful people in all of our present historical
 experience (irritated Jung till the day he died!).
 
   The Greek grasp of rational visions, less group oriented, has come
 down to found many modern successful nations. My only point being to
 not oversimplify the optional measures and paths that crosses our
 judgements.
 
 DB> To some considerable extent, this habit of mind is still here; I
 DB> present some collection of observations, and my rebuttal is some
 DB> quotation from the Bible, despite the fact that I have made very
 DB> plain that I do not count the Bible as reliable or authoritive.
 
 DB> To some considerable extent, this resembles George Orwell's 1984
 DB> and Goebell's methods which perhaps originated the idea that the
 DB> lie repeated often enough will be believed.  Psychology has many
 DB> studies of people dealing with data that contradicts a long held
 DB> belief, and they do not do well with it.  Reason, in such a case
 DB> as this, is fundamentally inadequate to expose the truth to most
 DB> fundamentalist minds.
 
    It is unclear that purity of truth has any epic good effect on
    the historical movement of our species through history. There
    are some who see religion as a big lie, yet many also feel that
    religion has served our species well. "Manifest destiny"! lie or
    national boon? .....we could dance through a thousand inquirious
    circumstances of truth in contention with untruth (so long as our
    sense of humor held up). Might not be all as simple as just saying
    it!  "Fundamentalists" represent plan B in nature's evolutionary
    scheme.
 
 DB> To some considerable extent, people make the decision about what
 DB> they will believe well before they are mature enough with enough
 DB> significant data to reach a well reasoned position, and are then
 DB> stuck with it.  The shrinks have shown that when a belief is put
 DB> to a test with contradictory data, that most people react with a
 DB> good deal of anxiety and even aggression... hence flamethrowers.
 
 ........................"Mature enough"? Interesting generalization!
 That we conclude emotionally first; then to find some logic fortress
 to defend that/those conclusions IS-THE-WAY of it. In time
 "reasonableness" occasionally sunshines through. NOTE: Throughout
 a great deal of superficial complaining, the "fundamentalists" garner
 more response words than any other category of philosophical exchange.
 If we didn't have "fundamentalists", we would have to invent them !
 
                           @@ ... Dave
--- Maximus/2 3.01
---------------